Retroperitoneal Extraovarian Fibrothecoma Mimicking a Malignant Epithelial Ovarian Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Fibrothecomas are benign sex cord-stromal tumors which rarely originate outside of the ovary. To date, two such cases have been reported in the literature. We report the third case of an extraovarian fibrothecoma and the first presenting similarly to a metastatic epithelial ovarian cancer. Clinical History. We describe a 62-year-old woman with history, physical examination, and imaging suggestive of metastatic ovarian cancer. CA-125 was elevated at 1291 U/mL. Paracenteses were negative for malignant cells and core biopsy showed spindle cell proliferation. A primary debulking surgery for a presumed ovarian cancer was planned. Method and Results. At surgery, 6 liters of ascites were drained. The uterus, ovaries, peritoneum, and omentum were normal. An 18 × 11 × 7 cm retroperitoneal mass was found between the left ureter and the sigmoid mesocolon, wrapped with sigmoid colon. Fallopian tubes and ovaries were normal. The mass was resected en bloc with the sigmoid colon, uterus, ovaries, and omentum. Microscopically, there was spindle cell proliferation typical of fibrothecoma. No ovarian tissue was identified in association with the tumor. Conclusion. This third case of extraovarian fibrothecoma highlights the importance of obtaining histologic evidence of malignancy prior to initiating neoadjuvant chemotherapy for a presumed ovarian cancer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".